Hiroshima, a stain on human history. By Paul ham.

Discussion in 'Military History and Militaria' started by samain11, Jul 27, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I have not read this book, just a review but that was enough to convince me he is just another revisionist lefty spouting drivel, who would rather have seen thousands of dead allied soldiers on Japanese beaches than use the bomb...I could be wrong though...has anyone here read it?
  2. Perhaps before you start having a go at a book you should probably read it.
    • Like Like x 3
  3. LancePrivateJones

    LancePrivateJones LE Book Reviewer

    Apparently quite a lot of people think this way.

    They tend to magnificently ignore the enormous projected casualties on both the Japanese and Allied sides that an invasion would have caused.

    They also magnificently ignore the fact that the war would have in all probability gone on until 1947-1948.

    Ahh, the benefits of hindsight, especially when (a) You weren't there and (b) You are a ******* idiot.
    • Like Like x 21
  4. I haven't read it, but there has long been an argument put forward, that by that stage of the war, there was no need for either invasion or for use of the bomb, that the war could have been ended by naval blockade. If that's his argument then it's hardly a novel one, though as we shall never know the answer he can argue it till blue in the face and nobody can prove him wrong.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    There's also the argument that the Yanks had to test the thing somewhere and that the Japs ******* deserved it.
    • Like Like x 18
  6. Naval blockade of what, half of the Far east?
  7. ****'em. Big boys rules
    • Like Like x 10
  8. I never said it was a good argument, did I?
  9. And I didn't say that you did, I merely commented old chap.
  10. Hindsight & history Eh.. easy for us to make judgement today....Appologists for the past that we had no control over because we were not even fecking born are complete Knobs and their opinions should be treated as garbage...liberal, lefty appologists need a good kicking!!
    • Like Like x 7
  11. Sometimes, one can judge a book by it's cover. For example, I don't feel I've missed anything by not reading Mein Kampf or the Koran; neither contains any views or information I feel is relevant to myself.

  12. Of course.
    Education? Pah, who needs it...
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Some of the side effect of using the bomb on Japan were to finish the war before the Russians joined in and extended their influence eastwards, they had agreed to attack Japan 3 months after the end of the war in Europe, and to demonstrate to them the effects of the atomic bomb and the fact that we (or at least the yanks) had it
    • Like Like x 1

    FORMER_FYRDMAN LE Book Reviewer

    I agree, there's no shortage of cretins ready to argue that - I skewered Monsignor Bruce Kent on this subject at a university debate thirty years ago when he was being even more clueless than usual. In his case, I think he got a perverse pleasure from being deliberately provocative - he certainly didn't like being provoked back - and I suspect this creature's of the same ilk if he's arguing the attacks were unnecessary (I don't need to read the book vamps, I'm familiar enough with the subject matter to know how off-beam such an interpretation is) .

    Those who want to push the case that Japan was ready to pack it in should simply hear the story of what had to be done to get Hirohito's surrender declaration recorded and past the guards.

    They should then consider the views of those who were actually fighting at the time - George MacDonald Fraser talks about it - who are generally consistent that the Japs they were up against showed little or no sign of giving up.

    They should then consider what the Japanese would have done with Allied POWs had they had the time - Palawan is just one example, Lord Liverpool's book gives others.

    Then, if it's dead Japanese that bothers them (they never seem to be bothered by the deaths of their fellow countrymen), they should consider the bodycount on Okinawa alone.

    Finally, they should have spoken to my next door neighbour, who watched the Hiroshima attack from a Japanese coal mine, and was all for it.

    High time for the Arrse publication of "Hiroshima and Nagasaki - damn good show".
    • Like Like x 13
  15. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    Submarine and mine warfare were enormously effective in cutting off Japan's communications and imports, particularly oil. However these in themselves would not have 'won' the war; they might have left Japan isolated and starving but that is not the same as forcing a victory. Even capitulation at that point could have left Japan in the same dangerous posiiton as Germany was left in, in 1918. It also leaves out of account a huge Japanese army in China living effectively off the land. Wars are only won when infantry occupies ground; this could only be achieved by invasion, likely incurring a million Allied casualties as the Japanese would have fought, however hoplessly, every inch of the way as they had demonstrated on Okinawa. The Bomb cut through this and allowed the Allies to enter Japan and take over on the ground. Invasion would probably also have cost many more Japanese casualties than were incurred at Hioroshima and Nagasaki, but at a dreadful Allied price.

    Lurking in the background was the possibility that even the mighty United States was running out of money.
    • Like Like x 2